Michael Jackson - Peter Pan or Paedophile?

[T_Bone]

And then there's the parents who've been nothng but pimps since the beginning, I hope child protective investigates these wierdo's too. Everyone else has known he's a wacko for years, what's THEIR problem?

Of course he's a Paedophile. Did he act on it? Probably.

 

[T_Bone]

seer wrote:
what's THEIR problem?

Conspiracy theorie; they framed Wacko Jacko so they could get a few mil in a settlement out of court.


Well, you gotta admit, not that unbelieveable..

Oh I completely agree the parents were whoring their children in the hopes of a windfall, I don't think I'd call it a set up though. You can tempt someone, but you can't make them commit a crime.

He's not a criminal because he's a Paedophile, he's a criminal because he molests children. Sexual preference shouldn't predispose one of a criminal behavior any more than it does with hetereosexuals, IM(revised)O

If we call it anything that even smells like a set up, it's the short skirt defence for rapists all over again. I admit I'd like to see these children removed from their parents if there's any monetary compensation though, they shouldn't have any reward for heir role, but I don't know how to word it without setting a portable precident for other crimes.

OT: In that book I just finished (Odd Thomas), Elvis appeared as a ghost to the main character, the ghosts only appear when they have unfinished business on earth that must be taken care of, they never did get around to what exactly that was though, I hate loose ends in stories, he should have had him stick around to kick Michael Jacksons ass for touching his daughter!  :lol: "Get back here you moonwalking freak! I'm not done with you yet!"

Googlefight!

elvis
(14 100 000 results)
versus
michael jackson
(14 200 000 results)
The winner is:    michael jackson

Damn, nevermind.

[T_Bone]

ajlwalker wrote:

Am I the only one who thinks we are maybe being a little too hard on the parents?

They need it. They arn't the victims, the children are. The only thing enticing the parents is money. Money and nothing else. These children are left alone, without their family present, with a stranger, which wouldn't happen if it wern't for the money. I'd try to be sympathetic to the parents if I could see an angle that suggested something other than this scenario, but I don't see it.

A lot of these folks appear to be in a vulnerale state with seriously unwell kids.

Which makes the excuse that the money is in the childs best interest LESS of an issue. If my child were dying there'd be nothing more valueable than time spent with that child, I'd be less likely to give up this free time to some stranger.

The parents arn't vunerable, the children are.

I don't know, maybe there's things I don't see, but most of what's been made public about the parents of most of the children, they appear as nothing more than pimps.

Hell, one of the fathers, when learning about advances from the wierd one, demanded more money to "Continue the relationship" (his own words)

[T_Bone]

Speelgoedmannetje wrote:

swift240 wrote:
I just dont know for 100% certain if he is or not, but then thats why the legal system is put in order to find out isnt it.

Of course, but why spending millions for avoiding legal system?

What do you mean?

[T_Bone]

redrumloa wrote:

T_Bone wrote:
What do you mean?

I think he means the child molestation case in the early 90's where MJ settled out of court with the family, for millions of dollars. The criminal case had to be dropped, because the victim withdrew due to being payed off.

Oh, yea, the "Why does he keep making millionaires out of Boyscouts" factor.
 :lol: